[darcs-users] [patch360] Solve issue1923: bad source warning mechanism warns ab...
builes.adolfo at googlemail.com
Thu Sep 9 13:55:37 UTC 2010
> 1. /some/expired/local/path
> 2. cant at reach-this-either.cz
> foo at example.com:blah/_darcs/sources
> 3. /example/local/path/we/dont/control
> 4. http://other-bad-stuff
> What we want to catch are 1, 2 and 4. Your issue1599 work catches 1,2,3,4
> with 3 being the case we had not considered. The current version of the
> issue1923 patch eliminates 1 and 3, where actually what we really want to
> eliminate is just 3.
> See what I mean? How can we address something like this? Ideally, we'd
> know about where the source entries come from. But maybe eliminating 1
> is just unfortunate, but acceptable collateral damage?
When we are loading the sources we know where they come from, in prefs
we have the following:
here <- parsehs `fmap` getPreffile (darcsdir ++ "/prefs/sources")
there <- (parsehs . lines . BC.unpack) `fmap`
(gzFetchFilePS (repodir </> darcsdir </>
`catchall` return B.empty)
Where "here" are the local sources and "there" the remotes.
That's why I just apply the filter to "there".
btw, Are you able to reproduce the issue with Darcs repository ?
More information about the darcs-users